Editoriales

¡No to War in Iraq!

It appears George W. Bush is going to war, disregarding not only world opinion, but also that of the American people. Both are opposed to his reckless adventurism, but he persists. Why? It’s hard to pick a single theory of the many that are offered, because most, if not all, of them probably are true:

• Oil –the oilmen in power -Bush, Cheney, and their inner circle- lust for the second largest oil reserve in the world. True.
• The Oedipus complex –Bush feels a filial obligation to finish the job on Saddam that his father didn’t. Or, is he filled with a need to show the world he’s a better man than his father? Probably true, on both counts.
• Chauvinism –(please pardon this French--I’m sure Mr. Bush prefers “patriotism”). Bush and the American right wing, barely able to hide its disdain for the UN, seek to reaffirm American superiority. Also true and, by the way, given the pivotal humanitarian relief role the UN will be asked to play in rebuilding the impending Iraqi shambles, when, if ever, will we pay our UN dues?
• Distraction –whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden?–As Afghanistan was before him, Saddam Hussein is the convenient scapegoat used to make Americans forget the failure of the Bush administration to capture Osama. Unfortunately for this administration, Osama keeps popping up, reminding Americans of this failure. Very sad–and, very true.
• Israel –at the core of this “crusade” against Islam has been the blindly followed “support-Israel-at-all-costs” foreign policy of the U.S. government since Israel’s creation in 1948. Beginning with the Carter administration, however, the U.S. had at least, maintained some semblance of impartiality, maintaining contact with both Israelis and Palestinians, and working to keep the peace. These contacts came close to resulting in an accord during the Clinton administration. Bush, however has thrown any appearance of impartiality to the wind; there’s no question where Bush’s unconditional support lies. Again, also true and also, very sad.
• Machismo – despite the silver spoon inherited from his dad, there is no doubt that George Bush fancies himself a Texas cowboy. This cowboy is a moral absolutist as dangerous as his right wing followers who consider “good versus evil” the only way to look at the world. Frighteningly, also true.
• Defense is the first –indeed the only- job of government. This is yet another right wing canard. Lavishly underwriting military adventures, in combination with lavish tax breaks for the wealthy, is the method conservative Republicans hope to use to starve the government of funds, preventing its support of any social agenda. By keeping the country focussed on a war, Bush diverts our attention away from pressing social, educational and economic problems. Again, true

And so, why a war? And why now? Why Iraq, and not North Korea, Sudan, Iran, Syria, or even Pakistan? Probably because Saddam is an easier target. But the world is not ready for war. Listen:

• France, regardless of its motives, is against the war and will veto any UN resolution that calls for one, as will China and Russia. Several others in the UN Security Council wil vote against the war.
• The Spanish, Italian, British and Bulgarian governments are shamelessly ignoring the will of their people. In Spain, 94% of the people oppose the war; in Italy, 87%; in England, 84%. People in Turkey are 94% against the war. Despite the Bush administration’s attempt at bribery, the Turkish Parliament has refused to allow American troops to use their country as a staging area. If the bribery pays off, the “coalition of the willing” as Bush calls it, may be more accurately named the “coalition of the bought off.” Shame on any nation whose citizens oppose invading Iraq if they ultimately decide to accept Bush’s blood money.
• Hans Blix and the inspectors are succeeding in their search. Iraq is now destroying its missiles. Inspections work. Let the inspectors continue their work.
• The Pope adamantly opposes this war. His Cardinals and Bishops are making such opposition an issue in Sunday sermons around the world. The Pope, another moral absolutist if there ever was one, is right on this one.

Probably the only absolute in this whole affair is the doctrine of “first strike.” As Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia said:

“The doctrine of preemption – the idea that the U.S., or any other nation, can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening, but may be threatening in the future - is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self-defense…”

It also violates international law, we may add. The Muslim world is justifiably unhappy with us. We help them when it’s convenient and ignore them when it’s not. We don’t want Muslim countries to be truly democratic because the current oligarchies help us protect the oil. We’d immediately turn our backs on any democracy that would threaten our access to it. There is no reason to believe we will behave differently now, despite what Bush says. Saddam is the product of American foreign policy. This war will create more terrorists and will not advance the cause of democracy.

For some reason, the American press, politicians and the general population have been strangely silent. A mood of resignation seems to prevail across the country, punctuated occasionally by aggressive outbursts of jingoism from the White House and right wing hawks both inside and outside the administration. American boys and ma ny innocent Iraqis are going to die. Their blood will be in our hands unless we speak up.

Wake up, America! Heed the words of Senator Byrd:

“To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a last resort, not a first choice. I must truly question the judgement of any president who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation which is over 50 percent children under 15, is in the highest moral tradition of our country.

This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.” (from his remarks delivered Feb. 12 on the US Senate floor)

Javier Bustamante, Editor

To continue reading about the opposition to the war in Iraq, keep reading here